ArticleEuropean radiology2024
The earliest optimal timing for total-body
Article in European radiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impaired glymphatic function is associated with synaptic loss in cognitive impairment.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026Article
- A prospective comparison of early versus lateScientific reports · 2025Article
- Exploration the feasibility and additional value of [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2025Article
- Multiple diffusion models for predicting pathologic response of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2024Article
- Multi-pool chemical exchange saturation transfer MRI in glioma grading, molecular subtyping and evaluating tumor proliferation.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2024Article
- Improvement of image quality in diffusion-weighted imaging with model-based deep learning reconstruction for evaluations of the head and neck.Magma (New York, N.Y.) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate the earliest optimal timing for positron emission tomography (PET) scans after
methodsThis prospective study enrolled patients who underwent 60-min dynamic
resultsA total of 30 patients with suspected malignant tumours were analysed. In the images reconstructed over 10-min intervals, longer acquisition times were associated with lower background uptake and better image quality. Some lesions could not be detected until G30-40. The lesion detection rate, uptake, and LBRs did not differ significantly among G30-40, G40-50, and G50-60 (all p > 0.05). The SUVmean and LBRs of primary tumours in the reconstructed images did not differ significantly among the 5-min intervals between 30 and 40 min; for metastatic and benign lesions, G34-39 and G35-40 showed significantly better SUVmean and LBR values than the other images. The G34-39 and G50-60 scans showed no significant differences in uptake, LBRs, or detection rates (all p > 0.05).
conclusionThe earliest optimal time to start acquisition was 34 min after injection of half-dose [ CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: This study evaluated KEY POINTS: • A prospective single-centre study showed that the earliest optimal time point to start acquisition was 34 min after injection of half-dose [
Indexed as
Identifiers
38110627What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.